Monday, February 15, 2016

Leave it to Senator Warren to have the final say concerning the replacement of Scalia on the Supreme Court.

The sudden death of Justice Scalia creates an immediate vacancy on the most important court in the United...
Posted by U.S. Senator Elizabeth Warren on Sunday, February 14, 2016
And there you go, nuff said.

You know every time I read something like this from Warren, I wish SHE were on the Democratic ballot in this elections cycle.

Because if she were it would change EVERYTHING.


  1. Anonymous4:06 AM

    She is an impressive person. She tells it like it is. She makes me proud I'm a democrat.

  2. Anonymous4:09 AM

    Senator Warren - YES, QUEEN! Go gurrl! Urp!
    Nominee Warren - No, not really. Thank you.

    Sorry, no-one's THAT interested.

    1. Speak for yourself.

    2. Anonymous9:53 AM

      Make sense or STFU and sit down, 4:09.

  3. Anonymous4:22 AM

    I wish she were running for president. I would be excited about this election, like I was in 2008 and 2012 because of President Obama.
    She is the best. Such a wonderful woman, genuine, and upstanding for the people.

  4. Leland4:48 AM

    OUCH! Another smack. First Cruz gets slammed by his law professor and then Warren slams the repubes to remind them of their DUTY under the Constitution!

    Someone's getting tired of cranky children in need of naps!

    1. Anonymous5:24 AM

      Shame God didn't take Scalia away before he voted against policies to "conserve" the world's climate. Not that the gluttonous Scalia was the epitome of healthy living.

    2. "...Article II Section 2 of the Constitution says the President of the United States nominates justices to the Supreme Court, with the advice and consent of the Senate."

      No mention of the House of Representatives?
      They don't advice and consent?

      Too bad lazy Democrats didn't vote in 2012 or it would be a slam dunk. Or, was the gerrymandering in apparently the majority of districts so biased against Democratic votes that Dems lost the Senate? And will that happen again in both houses because of it?" Just asking.

    3. It will only get worse after Obama makes his choice and the Senate drags their feet.

      The Democrats will continue to wield the hammer and the Republicans will lose the White House and seats come November. I can't believe they are so stupid they don't see that coming.

      They need to shut the fuck up before they permanently damage themselves so badly that even confirming Obama's nomination won't help.

  5. Anonymous5:16 AM

    Indeed. SHE would be a strong candidate. Pleasantly vocal. Mild in manner. Reasonable on issues. She has many solutions on our important immediate concerns. And thank goodness the military has offered to freeze the eggs of women now qualified for the front line in our wars !! Gotta keep huMANity going.

  6. Leave Elizabeth Warren in the Senate, please, where she's doing a great job. She could be a Lion of the Senate like her MA predecessor, Ted Kennedy.

    But for fuck's sake, she'd be a fool to run for president. (And I assume she knows it). Because from the moment of her assuming power, she'd "disappoint" her true believers by not being able to get everything done they believed she'd "promised" them. The same thing happened to Obama, when he was unable to deliver on all his campaign promises. (Gitmo, anyone?)

    Our lefty true believers are often as ignorant of our government system as their compatriots on the right. I think Elizabeth Warren is very smart and knows she'd never live up to their expectations of her. But she can make a big difference in the Senate, and that's where I believe she'll stay, at least for a while.

    1. Anonymous6:18 AM

      Gammyjill 6:00 AM

      So do you think John Kennedy, Robert Kennedy, Teddy Kennedy, Hubert Humphrey, President Obama, John Edwards, John Kerry, Hillary Clinton, Bernie Sanders and MANY MORE, fools for running for president? They are were senators, and Bernie is still a senator.
      I don't see anything wrong with a senator running for president if HE/SHE thinks it is a benefit for the masses.
      It is not up to you to call anyone a fool if they choose to run for president.

      And please don't call us lefties ignorant, that is just ignorant for you to do that.

    2. Leland6:32 AM

      "...(Gitmo, anyone?)"

      You forget he still has a year in office. And wasn't there some sort of "flap" recently about him having to ORDER the military to do as he told them? (That's facetious, BTW.)

      One year is 25% of his second term in office. I won't say anything about him NOT following through on his promises until after his term is up. Besides, I think he has done a far better job of following through than most of his predecessors.

    3. Hey, Anon@6.18a, I'M a lefty myself! A longtime lefty. And I admire all the good Dems who put themselves out to run for office to better our country. BUT, I would not have written the above comment before Obama's presidency. I'll explain why.

      I think Obama has done a terrific job as president, without any help from the opposing party, which opposed him from his election onwards. He certainly didn't let ME down. I stood on the Senate side of the US capital building in the freezing cold with my sons and daughter-in-law and the most diverse crowd I've ever seen - let alone been in - and watched as our first black president took the oath of office. And then the sniping began.

      I could deal with the sniping from the Right; that was expected. But what I couldn't stand was the sniping from the left as his term went on. "Where's the change", "Why didn't Obama do this...or that". "Well, what a disappointment he is". These were people who - good at heart - had little idea of the day to day running of government and the actual "making the sausage". They thought Obama could wave his arms and things would get done. I was disgusted at what I read on the far left blogs.

      Again, I adore Obama and nothing he did disappointed me but there you are.
      And I think Elizabeth Warren "inspires" people the same way Obama does and would be subject to the same "feet of clay" if she was elected.

    4. 66gardeners10:21 AM

      The sniping against Hillary is also nonproductive

    5. @Gammyjill -- it had to be said and you said it better than most. He has had grace under pressure for 7 years and nobody should underestimate what he will do in his 8th.
      He continues to get things despite the endless crap of the goppers. A weaker man would have crumbled long, long ago.

    6. @Gammyjill -- it had to be said and you said it better than most. He has had grace under pressure for 7 years and nobody should underestimate what he will do in his 8th.
      He continues to get things despite the endless crap of the goppers. A weaker man would have crumbled long, long ago.

    7. Anonymous2:04 PM

      + on potus wonderful job.

  7. Anonymous6:30 AM

    Hillary Clinton is as smart, or smarter, than Elizabeth Warren. Plus, she has so much governmental experience and community service (like President Obama did!).

    I would love seeing a ticket of Clinton/Warren as I think they'd win hands down! BOTH are outstanding women!

    1. Anonymous9:09 AM

      And this is how dumb women think.

    2. Anonymous10:22 AM

      Berniebro clean up aisle 909

    3. That ticket won't fly. Too many won't want a woman president and if the president dies, the VP is also a woman.

      There are the anti-Hillarys and the anti-Warrens in the independents and Republicans that won't cross over for a double woman ticket.

      Yeah, it's totally sexist but it's also the current reality.

      Warren also has more in common with Bernie than she has with Hillary.

      And being VP is a step down from being Senator. You only get to vote when there is a tie. She would lose her ability to get stuff done as a VP.

  8. Anonymous6:57 AM

    Of course she's right. That doesn't mean that the playground kiddies in congress will do the jobs they were hired to do. Shows that playground kiddies should not be running the country. Who is listening?

  9. Anonymous8:48 AM

    Exactly! That is why she, Senator Warren and Senator Sanders NEED TO STAY where they are now. Change comes when LAWS are changed.

    President Obama can nominate himself he choose too.

  10. 66gardeners9:29 AM

    The fallout from this Supreme Court obstructionism will set' the republican presidential candidates campaigns on fire.

    Thank goodness for the internet. History is in the making, and republicans are on the wrong side.

  11. Anonymous9:29 AM


  12. Anonymous2:02 PM

    This repub to stop Potus supreme court justice is crazy. Impeach them all, recall, whatever. State legislatures stop working too same as repubs. No state work. People will revolt. Just a dream.

  13. That ticket wouldn't win.

    However, if she would consent to be on the Supreme Court, I could see her getting the NEXT nomination under whatever Democratic president we'll have for the next term or two.

    Obama can't nominate her as she'd never be confirmed by the current Senate. But when the Dems have the majority, it's hers if she wants it. And she can do a lot more good for a lot longer without all of the crap on the Supreme Court than she can do in the Senate.

    Obama would do better to nominate Sri Srivinasan or Merrick Garland now and let the next president nominate Warren when the next opening comes. And it will come. (Hopefully it will be Thomas.)

  14. Anita Winecooler4:38 PM

    I like her style, blunt, quick on her feet, and to the point. Well put, Mrs Warren.


Don't feed the trolls!
It just goes directly to their thighs.